Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> On 1 Jun 1997, Mark Eichin wrote:
>
> > > I believe libc5.so is LGPL...
> >
> > I don't. /usr/doc/libc5//copyright doesn't *mention* the LGPL *at
> > all*, though the libc6 one mentions both.
>
> Yep, the copyright file does not mention the LGPL at all. This seems to me
> to be very limiting of commercial software running on linux.
I believe that regardless of what our copyright file says, glibc 1.0
(libc5) and 2.0 (libc6) are both LGPL--at least the library parts.
Other programs grouped with the libc package are probably GPL.
If our copyright file says otherwise, our copyright file is wrong. This
should be looked into. I'd grab the source and check myself, but it
takes a long time over a 28.8k line.
--Galen
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .